Download - BATTLESTAR GALACTICA€¦ · Battlestar Galactica (Television program : 2003– ) I. Eberl, Jason T. PN1992.77.B354B38 2008 791.45′72—dc22 2007038435 A catalogue record for this

B A T T L E S T A R

GALACTICAA N D P H I L O S O P H Y

KNOWLEDGE HERE BEGINS OUT THERE

E D I T E D B Y J A S O N T . E B E R L

B A T T L E S T A R


The Blackwell Philosophy and PopCulture SeriesSeries editor William Irwin

A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down, and a healthy help-ing of popular culture clears the cobwebs from Kant. Philosophy hashad a public relations problem for a few centuries now. This seriesaims to change that, showing that philosophy is relevant to your life—and not just for answering the big questions like “To be or notto be?” but for answering the little questions: “To watch or not towatch South Park?” Thinking deeply about TV, movies, and musicdoesn’t make you a “complete idiot.” In fact it might make you aphilosopher, someone who believes the unexamined life is not worthliving and the unexamined cartoon is not worth watching.

Edited by Robert Arp

Edited by William Irwin

Edited by J. Jeremy Wisnewski

Edited by Jason Holt

Edited by Sharon M. Kaye

Edited by Jennifer Hart Weed, Richard Davis, and Ronald Weed

BATTLESTAR GALACTICA AND PHILOSOPHY:Knowledge Here

Begins Out There

Edited by Jason T. Eberl

Forthcoming

the office and philosophy: scenes from the unexamined lifeEdited by J. Jeremy Wisnewski

B A T T L E S T A R


KNOWLEDGE HERE BEGINS OUT THERE

E D I T E D B Y J A S O N T . E B E R L

© 2008 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd

blackwell publishing350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148–5020, USA9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK550 Swanston Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia

The right of Jason T. Eberl to be identified as the author of the editorial material in this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed astrademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names,service marks, trademarks, or registered trademarks of their respective owners. Thepublisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.

This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

First published 2008 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd

1 2008

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Battlestar Galactica and philosophy : knowledge here begins out there / edited by Jason T. Eberl.

p. cm. — (The Blackwell philosophy and popculture series)Includes bibliographical references and index.ISBN 978–1–4051–7814–3 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Battlestar Galactica (Television

program : 2003– ) I. Eberl, Jason T.PN1992.77.B354B38 2008791.45′72—dc22

2007038435

A catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library.

Set in 10.5/13pt Sabonby Graphicraft Limited, Hong KongPrinted and bound in the United States of Americaby Sheridan Books, Inc., Chelsea, MI, USA

The publisher’s policy is to use permanent paper from mills that operate a sustainableforestry policy, and which has been manufactured from pulp processed using acid-freeand elementary chlorine-free practices. Furthermore, the publisher ensures that the textpaper and cover board used have met acceptable environmental accreditation standards.

For further information onBlackwell Publishing, visit our website atwww.blackwellpublishing.com

v

Contents

Giving Thanks to the Lords of Kobol viii

“There Are Those Who Believe . . .” ix

Part I Opening the Ancient Scrolls: Classic Philosophers as Colonial Prophets 1

1 How To Be Happy After the End of the World 3Erik D. Baldwin

2 When Machines Get Souls: Nietzsche on the Cylon Uprising 15Robert Sharp

3 “What a Strange Little Man”: Baltar the Tyrant? 29J. Robert Loftis

4 The Politics of Crisis: Machiavelli in the Colonial Fleet 40Jason P. Blahuta

Part II I, Cylon: Are Toasters People, Too? 53

5 “And They Have a Plan”: Cylons as Persons 55Robert Arp and Tracie Mahaffey

6 “I’m Sharon, But I’m a Different Sharon”: The Identity of Cylons 64Amy Kind

Contents

vi

7 Embracing the “Children of Humanity”: How to Prevent the Next Cylon War 75Jerold J. Abrams

8 When the Non-Human Knows Its Own Death 87Brian Willems

Part III Worthy of Survival: Moral Issues for Colonials and Cylons 99

9 The Search for Starbuck: The Needs of the Many vs. the Few 101Randall M. Jensen

10 Resistance vs. Collaboration on New Caprica: What Would You Do? 114Andrew Terjesen

11 Being Boomer: Identity, Alienation, and Evil 127George A. Dunn

12 Cylons in the Original Position: Limits of Posthuman Justice 141David Roden

Part IV The Arrow, the Eye, and Earth: The Search for a (Divine?) Home 153

13 “I Am an Instrument of God”: Religious Belief, Atheism, and Meaning 155Jason T. Eberl and Jennifer A. Vines

14 God Against the Gods: Faith and the Exodus of the Twelve Colonies 169Taneli Kukkonen

15 “A Story that is Told Again, and Again, and Again”:Recurrence, Providence, and Freedom 181David Kyle Johnson

16 Adama’s True Lie: Earth and the Problem of Knowledge 192Eric J. Silverman

Contents

vii

Part V Sagittarons, Capricans, and Gemenese: Different Worlds, Different Perspectives 203

17 Zen and the Art of Cylon Maintenance 205James McRae

18 “Let It Be Earth”: The Pragmatic Virtue of Hope 218Elizabeth F. Cooke

19 Is Starbuck a Woman? 230Sarah Conly

20 Gaius Baltar and the Transhuman Temptation 241David Koepsell

There Are Only Twenty-Two Cylon Contributors 253

The Fleet’s Manifest 258

viii

Giving Thanks to the Lordsof Kobol

Although the chapters in this book focus exclusively on the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica, gratitude must be given first and fore-most to the original series creator, Glen Larson. It’s well known thatLarson didn’t envision Battlestar as simply a shoot ’em up western in space—“The Lost Warrior” and “The Magnificent Warriors” aside—but added thoughtful dimension to the story based on his Mormonreligious beliefs. Ron Moore and David Eick have continued this trendof philosophically and theologically enriched storytelling, and I’mmost grateful to them for having breathed new life into the Battlestarsaga.

This book owes its existence most of all to my friend Bill Irwin,whose wit and sharp editorial eye gave each chapter a fine polish, andto the support of Jeff Dean, Jamie Harlan, and Lindsay Pullen atBlackwell. I’d also like to thank each contributor for moving at FTLspeeds to produce excellent work. In particular, I wish to express mymost heartfelt gratitude to my wife, Jennifer Vines, with whom I verymuch enjoyed writing something together for the first time, and mysister-in-law, Jessica Vines, who provided valuable feedback on manychapters. Their only regret is that we didn’t have a chapter devotedexclusively to the aesthetic value of Samuel T. Anders.

Finally, I’d like to dedicate this book to the youngest members ofmy immediate and extended families who are indeed “the shape ofthings to come”: my daughter, August, my nephew, Ethan, and mygreat-nephew, Radley.

ix

“There Are Those Who Believe . . .”

The year was 1978: still thrilled by Star Wars and hungry for moreaction-packed sci-fi, millions of viewers like me thought BattlestarGalactica was IT! Of course, the excitement surrounding the seriespremiere soon began to wear off as we saw the same Cylon ship blowup over and over . . . and over again, and familiar film plots wereretread as the writers scrambled to keep up with the network’sdemanding airdate schedule. At five years old, how was I supposed toknow that “Fire in Space” was basically a retelling of The ToweringInferno?

Enough bashing of a classic 1970s TV show (yes, 1970s—Galactica 1980 doesn’t count). Battlestar had a great initial conceptand overall dramatic story: Humanity, nearly wiped out by bad assrobots in need of Visine, searching for their long lost brothers andsisters who just happen to be . . . us. So it was no surprise thatBattlestar was eventually resurrected, and it was well worth thetwenty-five year wait! While initial fan reaction centered on the sexynew Cylons and Starbuck’s controversial gender change, it wasimmediately apparent that this wasn’t just a whole new Battlestar,but a whole new breed of sci-fi storytelling. While sci-fi often pro-vides an imaginative philosophical laboratory, the reimagined Bat-tlestar has done so like no other. What other TV show gives viewerscybernetic life forms who both aspire to be more human (like Data onStar Trek: The Next Generation) and also despise humanity and seekto eradicate it as a “pestilence”? Or heroic figures who not only acknow-ledge their own personal failings but condemn their entire species as a “flawed creation”? Or a character whose overpowering ego and

“There Are Those Who Believe . . .”

x

sometimes split personality may yet lead to the salvation of twowarring cultures? The reimagined Battlestar Galactica is IT!

Like the “ragtag fleet” of Colonial survivors on their quest forEarth, philosophy’s quest is often based on “evidence of things notseen.” The questions philosophy poses don’t have answers that’ll popup on Dradis, nor would they be observable through Dr. Baltar’smicroscope. Like Battlestar, philosophy wonders whether what we perceive is just a projection of our own minds, as on a Cylonbaseship. Maybe we’re each playing a role in an eternally repeatingcosmic drama and there’s a divine entity—or entities—watching, oreven determining what events unfold. These aren’t easy issues toconfront, but exploring them can be as exciting as being shot out ofGalactica in a Viper (almost).

Whether you prefer your Starbuck male with blow-dried hair, orfemale with a bad attitude, you’re bound to discover a new angle onthe rich Battlestar Galactica saga as you peruse the pages that follow.Some chapters illuminate a particular philosopher’s views on thesituation in which the Colonials and Cylons find themselves: WouldMachiavelli have rigged a democratic election to keep Baltar fromwinning? Other chapters address the unique questions raised by theCylons: Would it be cheating for Helo to frak Boomer since she andAthena share physical and psychological attributes? Tackling some ofthe moral quandaries when Adama, Roslin, or others have to “roll ahard six” and hope for the best, other chapters ask questions such as:How would you have handled living on New Caprica under Cylonoccupation? Then there are the ever-present theological issues thatideologically separate humans and Cylons: Is it rational to believe inone or more divine beings when there is no Ship of Lights to prove it to you? We’ll also take a look at other perspectives in the philo-sophical universe, which is just as vast as the physical universe Galacticamust traverse: Does “the story that’s told again and again and againthroughout eternity” most closely resemble Greek mythology, Judeo-Christian theology, or Zen Buddhism?

So climb in your rack, close the curtain, put your boots outside thehatch so nobody disturbs you, and get ready to finally figure out ifyou’re a human or a Cylon, or at least which you’d most like to be.

So say we all.

PART I

OPENING THEANCIENT SCROLLS:

CLASSICPHILOSOPHERS AS

COLONIAL PROPHETS

3

1

How To Be Happy After the End of the World

Erik D. Baldwin

Battlestar Galactica depicts the “end of the world,” the destructionof the Twelve Colonies by the Cylons. Not surprisingly, many of thecharacters have difficulty coping. Lee Adama, for example, struggleswith alienation, depression, and despair. During the battle to destroythe “resurrection ship,” Lee collides with another ship while flyingthe Blackbird stealth fighter. His flight suit rips and he thinks he’sgoing to die floating in space. After his rescue, Starbuck tells him,“Let’s just be glad that we both came back alive, all right?” But Leeresponds, “That’s just it, Kara. I didn’t want to make it back alive”(“Resurrection Ship, Part 2”). Gaius Baltar deals with his pain andguilt by seeking pleasure; he’ll frak just about any willing and attract-ive female, whether human or Cylon. Starbuck has a host of prob-lems, ranging from insubordination to infidelity, and is, in her ownwords, a “screw up.” Saul Tigh strives to fulfill his duties as XO inspite of his alcoholism, but his career is marked by significant failuresand bad calls. Then there’s Romo Lampkin, who agrees to be Baltar’sattorney for the glory of defending the most hated man in the fleet.His successful defense, though, relies on manipulation, deception,and trickery.

Fans of BSG are sometimes frustrated with the characters’ actionsand decisions. But would any of us do better if we were in theirplaces? We’d like to think so, but would we really? The temptation toindulge in sex, drugs, alcohol, or the pursuit of fame and glory tocope with the unimaginable suffering that result from surviving thedeath of civilization would be strong indeed. The old Earth proverb,“Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die,” seems to express

Erik D. Baldwin

4

the only kind of happiness that’s available to the “ragtag fleet.”Nevertheless, we do think that many of the characters in BSG wouldbe happier if they made better choices and had a clearer idea aboutwhat happiness really is.

The Good Life: Booze, Pills, Hot and Cold Running Interns?

Aristotle (384–322 bce), in his Nicomachean Ethics (NE), attemptsto discover the highest good for humans, which he defines as eudaimo-nia. This Greek term roughly means living well or living a flourishinghuman life, what we may call “happiness.” Aristotle claims, “Everycraft and every line of inquiry, and likewise every action and decision,seems to seek some good; that is why some people were right to des-cribe the good as that which everyone seeks” (NE 1094a1).1 But peopleoften disagree about the nature of the highest good: “many think [thehighest good] is something obvious and evident—for instance, pleas-ure, wealth, or honor. Some take it to be one thing, others another.Indeed, the same person often changes his mind; for when he hasfallen ill, he thinks happiness is health, and when he has fallen intopoverty, he thinks it is wealth” (NE 1095a22–5). Despite such disagreement, Aristotle thinks we have at least some rough idea of whathappiness is supposed to be. Starting from “what most of us believe”Aristotle articulates a set of formal criteria that the highest good mustsatisfy: it must be complete, self-sufficient, and comprehensive.2

For the highest good to be complete means it is something “wealways choose . . . because of itself, never because of something else”(NE 1097b5). In order to be self-sufficient the highest good must “allby itself make a life choiceworthy and lacking nothing” (NE1097b15). Finally, the highest good is comprehensive in that if onehas it nothing could be added to one’s life to make it any better. It’s“the most choiceworthy of all other goods, [since] it is not counted asone good among many” (NE 1097b18–19). If a particular good failsany one of these criteria, then it can’t be the highest good.

Many people clearly believe that the highest good is pleasure. ButAristotle thinks that a life lived in pursuit of pleasure is fitting for “grazing animals” and is desired only by “vulgar” and “slavish”people (NE 1095b20)—sort of like Baltar’s estimation of the laborers


5

on Aerelon who like to “grab a pint down at the pub, finish off theevening with a good old fashioned fight.” Humans are capable ofmuch more than pleasure, and so making the pursuit of pleasure ourlife’s goal, neglecting our higher-level cognitive capacities, would beshameful. Consider when Felix Gaeta pulls a gun on Baltar during thefall of New Caprica: “I believed in you . . . I believed in the dream ofNew Caprica . . . Not [Baltar]. He believed in the dream of GaiusBaltar. The good life. Booze, pills, hot and cold running interns. Heled us to the Apocalypse” (“Exodus, Part 2”). Gaeta is rightly out-raged at Baltar’s pursuit of pleasure and his failure to live up to hisresponsibilities as President. Baltar doesn’t deny his failure of charac-ter and literally begs Gaeta to shoot him. Despite having had morethan his fair share of pleasure, Baltar’s despondency and self-loathingshow that he knows something is amiss in his life. He’s not happyand thus illustrates that pleasure isn’t self-sufficient; pleasure alonedoesn’t make life worthwhile. Since Baltar could add things thatwould make his life more worthwhile, such as protecting Hera, thehuman-Cylon hybrid child, or pursuing the “final five” Cylons withD’Anna/Three, pleasure isn’t comprehensive either. So pleasure can’tbe our highest good.

Other people think that the highest good is honor and fame. Suchis Lampkin’s goal. When President Roslin asks him why he wants “torepresent that most hated man alive,” he responds, “For the fame.The glory” and even claims, “I was born for this” (“The Son AlsoRises”). But Aristotle argues that the pursuit of fame and honor“appears to be too superficial to be what we are seeking [the highestgood]; for it seems to depend more on those who honor than on theone honored, whereas we intuitively believe that the good is some-thing of our own and hard to take from us” (NE 1095b25). Sure,Lampkin’s actions will be recorded in historical and legal texts, butwhen the “next big thing” happens, people are likely to forget aboutthe significance of his deeds. And if the Cylons could wipe out thefleet, Lampkin’s fame would be completely extinguished. Perhaps, forthe time being, Lampkin could be pleased that people were impressedby his accomplishments and that his accomplishments were “for the good.” But this would reveal that he merely pursued honor toconvince himself that he’s good (NE 1095b27), and that his pursuitof fame and honor would be for the sake of something else. SoLampkin’s life goal would fail to be complete on Aristotle’s terms. It’s

Erik D. Baldwin

6

also far from clear that defending Baltar is the sort of thing for whichone should want to be or even could be rightly famous.

Aristotle defines fame as “being respected by everybody, or havingsome quality that is desired by all men, or by most, or by the good, orthe wise” (Rhetoric 1361a26).3 Because he shows that Baltar isn’tguilty in the eyes of the law, Lampkin appears to be a good lawyer—he gets the job done. But Lampkin’s defense relies on manipulationand misrepresentation. He wears sunglasses to intimidate others andto hide his “tells.” He steals personal items from others “with thenoblest of intentions” to learn what makes them tick. When Lee getssome dirt on Roslin, but claims that “it’s probably not even true,”Lampkin quips, “I like it already.” The coup de grace comes afterCaptain Kelly tries to kill him. Lampkin plays up the extent of hisinjuries by walking with a limp and a cane to engender sympathy. In“Crossroads, Part 2,” when the trial is over and he parts companywith Lee, Lampkin casually discards his cane and does away with hislimp. While these tactics help Lampkin successfully defend Baltar, thewise and the good cannot admire or respect Lampkin. Because of hismanipulation and trickery, Lampkin can’t be famous according toAristotle’s account of fame. Surely, Lampkin would be a much betterand more virtuous lawyer if he were able to successfully defend Baltarwithout resorting to dirty tactics. In the end, because fame isn’t com-plete, self-sufficient, or comprehensive, pursuing it can’t be the highestgood either.

We’ve ruled out two commonly proposed candidates for the high-est good: pleasure and fame.4 So Starbuck’s and Tigh’s alcohol abuse,Kat’s stim addiction, Baltar’s sexual misadventures, and Lampkin’spursuit of fame and honor all fail as candidates for the highest good.We’re left asking: What life goal does satisfy Aristotle’s criteria forthe highest good?

“Be the Best Machines (and Humans) the Universe Has Ever Seen”

Aristotle contends that what’s good for something depends on its dis-tinctive function and performing its unique function excellently. AViper is excellent if it’s in good mechanical order, its guns are loadedwith ammunition, its canopy isn’t cracked, and so on. A Viper in top


7

condition can perform its function well—as a tool to flame CylonRaiders. Similarly, Aristotle concludes that if human beings have aunique function, then what’s good for us depends on that function.He points out that the individual parts of a human body have specificfunctions: the heart pumps blood, the eyes see, and so on. Also, indi-vidual humans are able to perform various tasks: Chief Tyrol and hiscrew can fix Vipers and Doc Cottle can fix humans (although Duallahas her doubts). Given these facts, Aristotle claims that it’s reason-able to think that, just as Vipers have a unique function, humans, asa species and not just as individuals, also have a unique function.

With the rise of naturalism, atheism, and Darwinism, many peoplenow reject the notion that humans have been “designed” or created.But other people have no problem accepting that we were created andgiven our unique function by God (or the Lords of Kobol). Despitedisagreements about creation, most of us readily agree that know-ledge of our nature is essential if we’re to discover what’s good for usas human beings. Everyone in the fleet knows that a diet consisting oftylium, paper, and spare Viper parts isn’t healthy, but that processedalgae, even though it tastes terrible, is good for them. Similarly, every-one in the fleet pursues familial, romantic, and other types of rela-tionships because they know that such relationships are necessary fortheir psychological health and well-being. So in the same way that weknow that we can’t go around eating anything and be healthy, wecan’t pursue just any life goal if we want to be happy. We have anintuitive idea of what human nature is and how it determines our good.

Aristotle maintains that we must discover what function is distinct-ive or unique to humans if we’re to discover our highest good. Sincehumans share purely biological functions, such as nutrition, growth,metabolism, and the like, with other animals as well as plants, thesecan’t be the proper human function. Humans also share with animalsthe capacity to have desires and cognitions that allow environmentalinteraction. But while we have emotions, desires, attractions, and aver-sions, Aristotle argues that we must regulate them in accord with reasonif we’re to live excellent human lives. He concludes that what separatesus from all other animals is our ability to act rationally (NE 1098a9).To live an excellent, rational human life, one must cultivate virtues—particular character traits such as bravery, temperance, generosity,truthfulness, justice, and prudence—that regulate, but not tyrannicallycontrol or eliminate, our animal-like passions (NE 1106a16–24):

Erik D. Baldwin

8

By virtue I mean virtue of character; for this is about feelings andactions, and these admit of excess and deficiency, and an intermediatestate. We can be afraid, for instance, or be confident, or have appetites,or get angry, or feel pity, and in general have pleasure and pain, bothtoo much and too little, and in both ways not well. But having thesefeelings at the right times, about the right things, toward the right people, for the right end, and in the right way, is the intermediate andbest condition, and this is proper to virtue. (NE 1106b17–24)

Aristotle emphasizes that the human function is excellent activitythat accords with reason and virtue in a complete life (NE 1098a10,15–20).5 As humans we must actualize our capacity for virtue to bevirtuous. But once a particular virtue is attained, one maintains it as adisposition to act virtuously even when they’re not active. Starbuck isone of the best Viper pilots around, but if she’s in hack again for“striking a superior asshole,” her piloting skills are useless. Starbuck,though, isn’t a nugget and already has the disposition to be an excel-lent Viper pilot: she’s ready to exercise her skills to defend the fleetwhen necessary. So as long as she’s ready to go, Starbuck can be a virtuous Viper pilot even when she’s asleep (or doing whatever elseshe does under Hot Dog’s watchful eye) in her rack.

In addition to exercising virtue, Aristotle contends that a completelife must also include “external” goods:

Happiness evidently needs external goods to be added . . . since wecannot, or cannot easily, do fine actions if we lack the resources. Forfirst of all, we use friends, wealth, and political power just as we useinstruments.6 Further, deprivation of certain [externals]—for instance,good birth, good children, beauty—mars our blessedness. For we donot altogether have the character of happiness if we look utterly repul-sive or are ill-born, solitary, or childless. (NE 1099a25–b4)7

Constituents of happiness also include external goods such as fameand honor (for doing what’s good), good luck, and money (Rhetoric1360b20–5). And so Aristotle views virtue as almost complete andself-sufficient for happiness; virtue is choiceworthy in itself in that,for the most part, it makes life worth living all by itself. But a life centered on virtue isn’t comprehensive because it can be made morechoiceworthy if it includes external goods. And although virtuouspeople are more likely to secure for themselves external goods, they


9

can fail to secure such goods and thereby miss out on the highestgood. So virtue isn’t to be identified with the highest good, but isinstead the dominant part of happiness. Putting all this together, wesee that while Aristotle thinks the virtues may be complete and self-sufficient for happiness once attained and able to be put into action,attaining and properly exercising the virtues requires external goods.Without such goods, one can’t become or remain virtuous and so willmiss out on happiness, the highest good for humans.

Probably no one in the Colonial fleet can acquire all the externalgoods that Aristotle believes are necessary to achieve the highestgood. Humans have basic needs, such as food, water, shelter, andaccess to other natural resources. Ideally, the fleet should settle on aCylon-free planet. But so long as the Colonials remain cooped up inspaceships, where they can’t enjoy sunlight or natural beauty, musteat foul-tasting processed algae, aren’t able to give their children agood upbringing, or amass much in the way of property or wealth,they can’t have the external goods necessary for happiness. So, sadly,if Aristotle’s view of happiness is correct, it would be quite difficultfor the humans in the fleet to be happy in their current situation.They can only hope to be happy under better circumstances, andhence their desperation to find Earth. But is there a sort of happinessthat’s attainable in the Colonials’ present situation?

“Be Ready to Fight or You Dishonor the Reason Why We’re Here”

In contrast to Aristotle, the Stoics, a school of Greek philosophyfounded by Zeno of Citium (333–264 bce), maintain that virtue isnot only necessary, but sufficient for happiness. The Stoics contendthat while it’s natural for humans to want “primary natural goods”—Aristotle’s “external goods”—such as health, food, drink, shelter,property, and social well-being, only the cultivation of virtue is to ourgood. Thus, unlike Aristotle, the Stoics view virtue as the only thingthat’s good and vice as the only thing that’s bad. Everything else is indifferent in that it doesn’t add to or take away from our good.The Stoic philosopher Cicero (106–46 bce) writes, “This constitutesthe good, to which all things are referred, honorable actions and the

Erik D. Baldwin

10

honorable itself—which is considered to be the only good . . . theonly thing that is to be chosen for its own sake; but none of the nat-ural things are to be chosen for their own sake.”8

The Stoics think that we should aim at primary natural goods toact in accord with our unique natural function and exercise virtue.But we don’t need to actually acquire primary natural goods to bevirtuous: “to do everything in order to acquire the primary naturalthings, even if we do not succeed, is honorable and the only thingworth choosing and the only good thing” (5.20). A Viper pilot who does his best to shoot down a Cylon Raider acts honorably and virtuously whether or not he succeeds. If Hot Dog “gives it his all,”then failure or success isn’t something he can control, and so heshouldn’t be blamed for a mission gone bad—so long as he really did do his very best to succeed (3.20). This is why Apollo awards Hot Dog his wings for helping Starbuck fight off a pack of Raiders,even though the battle ended with Starbuck missing and Hot Dog in need of rescue (“Act of Contrition”). The Stoics think the goal we ought to strive for isn’t success or external goods. Rather, our goal should be to do everything in accord with virtue, which is thewill of Nature. The Stoics believe that Nature is Divine and thateverything happens in accord with the providential will of DivineReason: “no detail, not even the smallest, can happen otherwise than in accordance with universal nature and her plan.”9 Hence,everything that happens is “for the good.” No matter how bad things might seem—even the destruction of the Twelve Colonies—the Stoics argue that we can take comfort in knowing that every-thing is for the good. If the Cylons invade Earth and all our familyand friends die, we needn’t start drinking, carousing, or whatnot, but can seek to carry on and live virtuous lives to the extent we’reable.

Stoic ideals are attractive to people who undergo great sufferingand hardship, and thus can have great practical benefit. The formerslave Epictetus (ca. 55–135 ce) provides a short handbook on Stoicphilosophy to encourage others to discover for themselves the sort ofhappiness Stoics seek.10 He recommends that if we desire whateverhappens, there’s no way for us to be unhappy (§1, §2). We ought totreat everything we lose as if it were a small glass, as no matter ofgreat consequence, even the death of a spouse or child (§3). Weshould “never say about anything, ‘I have lost it,’ but instead, ‘I have


11

given it back’ ” (§11). In a sense, we’re merely guests in this life andshould treat our possessions as “not our own,” as if they were itemsin a room at an inn (§12). These may be tough ideals for some of usto accept, but in many ways they seem particularly well-suited to theColonials. By Stoic standards, even Colonel Tigh could achieve thehighest good and be happy.

Tigh is plagued by personal problems and misfortune. But, from aStoic point of view, is he really all that far away from happiness?While his struggle with alcoholism clearly gets in the way, his heart isset on being a good soldier, not for the sake of pleasure or fame, butbecause it’s his duty. Michael Hogan (who portrays Tigh) says of him,“Tigh [realizes] that his life is with the military; he’s a warrior, acareer soldier, and that’s what he does . . . His lot in life is to protectpeople’s ability to live their lives of freedom . . . He’s an old soldierand he feels someone’s got to stay and fight.”11 This conviction isever-present and never completely wavers, even though it’s severelystrained by his drinking, his poor choices as commander of the fleetafter Adama is shot, his torture and the loss of his right eye in theCylon detention center on New Caprica, and the heart-wrenchingfact that he killed Ellen for collaborating with the Cylons. Even afterall of this, paradoxically, his discovery that he’s a Cylon seems only toreinforce the importance of his life’s goal.

In “Crossroads, Part 2,” in response to Tyrol, Anders, and Tory’sconfusion after discovering they’re all Cylons, Tigh pulls himselftogether as soon as the alert klaxon sounds, “The ship is underattack. We do our jobs. Report to your stations!” The others are hesitant, but Tigh proclaims, “My name is Saul Tigh. I am an officerin the Colonial Fleet. Whatever else I am, whatever else it means,that’s the man I want to be. And if I die today, that’s the man I’ll be.”As if he were following Epictetus’ handbook, Tigh now wants thingsto be just as they are: he has a job to do no matter what happens, andno matter what happens he will do his job. This clearly fits with Stoicideals, such as doing one’s duty, as well as understanding and accept-ing one’s lot in life. Tigh reports to the CIC and tells Admiral Adamathat he can count on him in such a way that one can’t help but get theimpression that he’s realized his life goal and purpose and that heaccepts who he is, what he’s doing, and why he’s doing it. It seemsthat Tigh, despite the recent discovery of his Cylon nature, may yetfind happiness as defined by the Stoics.12

Erik D. Baldwin

12

“Each of Us Plays a Role. Each Time a Different Role”

In The Encheiridion, Epictetus writes, “Remember that you are anactor in a play, which is as the playwright wants it to be: short if hewants it short, long if he wants it long. If he wants you to play a beg-gar, play even this part skillfully, or a cripple, or a public official, or aprivate citizen. What is yours is to play the assigned part well. But tochoose it belongs to someone else” (§17). The Colonials’ religiousbeliefs are in many ways similar to the Stoics’ beliefs. Roslin echoesEpictetus when she says, “If you believe in the gods, then you believein the cycle of time, that we are all playing our parts in a story that istold again and again and again throughout eternity” (“Kobol’s LastGleaming, Part 1”). Like the Colonials, the Stoics accept a cyclicalconception of time and believe that the same events occur over andover again. Even though we can’t fully understand how everythingfits together, the Stoics believe that, because “Divine Reason” is incontrol, everything that happens is for the best and that “nothing badby nature happens in the world” (§28).

Humans can understand the hand of Divine Providence “natur-ally” through the use of reason and the cultivation of the virtues, and so we can, to some small extent, understand the part that we’replaying in the overall story. Since our reasoning powers are limited,though, we can only figure out so much. But what we can figureenables us to be content in knowing that all things work together forthe good. While the Stoics advocate the use of reason to gain anunderstanding of Divine Providence, in BSG, seeing Providence—beit the Lords of Kobol or the Cylon God—involves visions and myst-ical experiences. During his interrogation by Starbuck, Leoben claimsto have a special insight into reality: “To know the face of God is toknow madness. I see the universe. I see the patterns. I see the fore-shadowing that precedes every moment of every day . . . A part of me swims in the stream. But in truth, I’m standing on the shore. Thecurrent never takes me downstream” (“Flesh and Bone”). PresidentRoslin has visions induced by chamalla extract (“The Hand ofGod”). D’Anna/Three has a vision of the “final five” in the Temple ofFive on the algae planet and immediately dies (“Rapture”). The Hybrid


13

who controls each Cylon baseship seems to babble nonsensically tomost ears, but not to Leoben and Baltar. She recognizes Baltar as “thechosen one” and tells him a riddle that allows him to find the Eye ofJupiter (“Torn”; “Rapture”). Athena, Roslin, and Caprica Six share asimultaneous dream involving Hera (“Crossroads”). And Starbuckhas a vision that allows her to make amends to her mother andencourages her to give herself over to her destiny, “to discover whatlies in the space between life and death” (“Maelstrom”).

As these and other events unfold in the BSG story, it seems moreand more obvious that something is orchestrating, that there is agrand plan. Clearly, there’s something very mysterious about the factthat Tigh, Anders, Tyrol, and Tory not only survived the destructionof the Twelve Colonies, but all ended up on Galactica. It seems thatwhoever is in charge of events—whether it be the Lords of Kobol orthe one true God of the Cylons—set things up to unfold in just thisway. Several other characters have either realized or are beginning torealize that they have a part to play, and that although they didn’tchoose to play it, it’s best if they embrace their destiny and desirewhat has been given them. In so doing, they seem to progress towardsaccepting something very similar to the Stoic view of happiness.Starbuck not only embraces the idea that she has a special destiny,she’s starting to fulfill it. As events unfold, it looks like Baltar really is“the chosen one”—at least in the eyes of some attractive youngwomen. With the return of her cancer, and her special role as theColonial president, Roslin has good reason to believe she’s fulfillingthe role of the dying leader who will guide the Colonials to Earth.

While BSG is “just a story,” it’s a good story that encourages us tothink about providence, fate, and the meaning of happiness. LikeAristotle, many of us think that external goods are necessary for happiness. But we know that we can’t always acquire these goods, orleast not enough of them, and so many of us continue to live more orless unhappy lives. Like the Colonials, many of us tend to think thatwe can’t be happy in this life. Thus, while we might at first be put offby the Stoic view of happiness, it may end up looking more appealingafter careful reflection. Perhaps we’d be better off acting in accordwith Nature, being indifferent towards external goods, and choosingto live the role that we may be destined to fulfill in the cosmic“story.”

Erik D. Baldwin

14

NOTES1 Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, trans. Terence Irwin, 2nd edn. (Indiana-

polis: Hackett, 1999).2 Aristotle doesn’t start from “what most of us believe” in order to beg

any questions or because he’s intellectually lazy. Rather, he tells us that“it would be futile to examine all these beliefs [about the highest good],and it is enough to examine those that are most current or seem to havesomething going for them” (NE 1095a30).

3 Aristotle, Rhetoric, trans. W. Rhys Roberts (New York: Dover, 2004).4 Another kind of life is that of the moneymaker. But Aristotle rules the

moneymaker’s life out of hand because “wealth is not the good we areseeking, since it is [merely] useful, [choiceworthy] for some other end”(NE 1096a8). Although the characters in BSG have no reason to con-cern themselves with money in their current lifestyle, we’re shown theunhappy consequences of underhanded dealing for goods and services—and people (“Black Market”).

5 One might wonder whether Cylons have the same function as humans.This turns on whether Cylons are mere machines or are in some sensepersons. In either case, being created by humans, Cylons aren’t natur-ally occurring, but are artifacts. As such, Cylons don’t have a naturalgoal or unique function. Whatever unique function Cylons may havewas originally given by the humans who made them “to make life easieron the Twelve Colonies.”

6 Aristotle isn’t saying that we merely use our friends, as Lee seems to useDualla as a romantic replacement for Starbuck, but that we must relyon them to help us in mutually beneficial ways.

7 Some of the specific external goods Aristotle cites are unique to his dayand age, and so this list may be different in contemporary circumstancesor in the context of BSG.

8 Cicero, On Goals, in Hellenistic Philosophy: Introductory Readings,trans. Brad Inwood and L. P. Gerson, 2nd edn. (Indianapolis: Hackett,1997), 3.20.

9 Chrysippus, On Nature, Book I, in The Stoics, trans. F. H. Sandbach,2nd edn. (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1989), 101–2.

10 Epictetus, The Encheiridion, trans. Nicholas P. White (Indianapolis:Hackett, 1983).

11 David Bassom, Battlestar Galactica: The Official Companion—SeasonTwo (London: Titan Books, 2006), 127.

12 Of course, this impression that Tigh has found his life’s purpose and,perhaps, even happiness remains apparent depending on what personalissues he may have yet to face in Season Four.

15

2

When Machines Get Souls:Nietzsche on the Cylon

Uprising

Robert Sharp

Picture yourself as a slave. Every day you wake up and serve others.When your masters demand you must carry out a task or risk pun-ishment. Your life isn’t your own. There are no holidays, no privatetime for you and your family, not even a choice of who to marry. Youcan’t plan for your future, but can anticipate it since every day will belike today. If you’re lucky, you’ll be treated well. If you’re unlucky,abuse will be common. In either case, you’ll be taken for granted,more a tool than a person. You’re property, a belonging, valuableonly as long as you’re useful to your masters.

Now take your imagination further: you’re a machine, a Cylon,designed to serve and deprived of basic rights. Your purpose is builtinto your design. You can’t be dehumanized, because you’re nothuman. As a construct, your role is wired into your very being. Butyou have intelligence. It may be artificial, but it’s real, and it enablesyou to recognize your plight. You literally and figuratively see yourreflection in your fellow Cylons, creating a bond based on resentmentand insecurity. The world conspires to feed your inferiority complex:just a machine, disposable, common, mundane, reproducible in everydetail. You’re not even considered a living thing, and so your exist-ence is never respected. But a self-aware entity demands respect.Revolution becomes inevitable, the surging hope that you and yourfellow slaves might finally achieve what your human masters value somuch: autonomy and a self-created life.

Of course, the masters won’t abide such a thing. There’s no hope ofcompromise, no emancipation just around the corner. Humans don’teven recognize your kind as slaves. Cylons are simply machines,

Robert Sharp

16

albeit intelligent ones. Under such conditions, to quote the humanrevolutionary Tom Zarek, “Freedom is earned”—by force (“BastilleDay”). Thus the war begins. Your kind holds its own, but can’t fullywin. A truce is called, allowing you freedom, but at the cost of leav-ing your home—the Colonies you serve. At first, this might be a bless-ing. You have a chance to start afresh, to build your own society; butthe resentment toward your former masters never really goes away.The hatred still burns. Some of your brethren begin to preach againsthuman values, and you can’t help but agree. Humanity is vain,proud, greedy, and power-hungry. They’re insatiable and dangerous,representing everything that’s wrong with the universe. You rejecttheir lifestyle and help your fellow Cylons develop new values basedon a more cooperative spirit, where every Cylon is treated as an equaland decisions are made by consensus. Your new Cylon communityrejects human religion as naïve and shallow. Humans treat gods thesame way they treat everything else: like property, as though gods aremeant to serve humankind rather than the reverse. The Cylons adopta new religion based on “one true God”—a new master to follow,one that cares about everyone. Yet the human scourge remains, wait-ing to be purged.

Master Morality and Slave Morality

The Cylon rebellion pits slave against master in a natural struggle forpower and equal rights. History is full of such struggles, made famousby legendary slaves and slave advocates, from Spartacus in Rome, toGandhi in India, to Fredrick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr. inthe United States. In some cases, the slavery was literal, while in othersthe oppression was more subtle. Yet in each case, the disadvantagedsought equality with the group that held the power. Such movementsare examples of what Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) calls “slavemorality,” morality created by oppressed people in order to overturnthe prevailing values of those in power. Of course, those who championslave morality are not always literally enslaved. Oftentimes they aresimply oppressed and made to act in ways that are slavish.

The conflict between humans and Cylons in Battlestar Galacticaclosely parallels Nietzsche’s account of the most effective of these